Глава 1. Всеобъемлющий символизм патристики. Великие каппадокийцы

The symbolic aesthetics of the author of Areopagitik did not arise out of nowhere. The allegorical-symbolic, figurative understanding of the texts of Holy Scripture began to take shape long before Christianity in Jewish Talmudic literature. Then this tradition was brought to almost unacceptable limits of hermeneutic arbitrariness by Philo of Alexandria 7 and again introduced into the framework of moderate exegesis by early Christian thinkers 8 . Many aspects of the theory of image and symbol, outlined by Philo and early Christian thinkers, were actively developed by the first Byzantine Fathers of the Church, especially the fathers of the Alexandrian-Cappadocia movement in the “golden age” of patristics - the 4th-5th centuries. 9 . Various forms of non-literal verbal understanding and expression arose when the formal-logical verbal capabilities of consciousness were still (or no longer) able to be adequate to the expressed phenomenon. Most often in the history of culture this concerned fairly high levels of spiritual life. If we talk about Christianity, then practically from the moment of its emergence - and it was formed, as we know, not from scratch, but by developing and continuing the rich traditions of the cultures of the Ancient World - in it the ideas of non-literal, symbolic, allegorical, etc. figurative thinking occupied a prominent, if not the main, place almost from the first centuries of the Christian era 10. The main reason for this, undoubtedly, is the fundamental transcendence, i.e., the unknowability and indescribability of God - the main object of the Christian faith, cult, philosophy, art, and practically the entire life of Christians. This was well felt and partially recognized by their Hebrew predecessors - first of all and most acutely, of course, Philo of Alexandria. His intuitions and ideas were actively adopted by Christian followers - the first Alexandrian Church Fathers Clement and Origen, and then became the property and rich food for thought of many representatives of the Alexandrian, Cappadocian and other schools of patristic thought. And the New Testament, as we know, contains enough indications that not everything in it should be understood literally. Jesus himself often spoke in parables and interpreted them here, and the Apostle Paul repeatedly asserted in his Epistles that much of what is communicated to us in Holy Scripture should be understood allegorically, for people are not yet ready to comprehend the highest truths in their direct or essential meaning. “Now we see through a glass darkly,” wrote Paul (1 Cor. 13:12). All this prompted the seeking consciousness of the most educated Christians, and there were many of them in the late antique world and especially in the Greek-speaking parts of the ecumene, to an independent search for Truth and truths (according to Jesus’ call: “seek and you will find” - Matthew 7:7) in the texts of Holy Scripture under their literal content. With particular enthusiasm, as already said, the Alexandrian and Cappadocian fathers, who had at hand the richest exegetical material of Philo of Alexandria and other Greco-Jewish interpreters of the Old Testament, did this; Moreover, they are examples of inspired, extremely free (on the verge of unbridled play of fantasy) allegorical interpretation. Among the early Alexandrian fathers, the most sophisticated exegete was Origen 11 . In the 4th century. In many ways, the Alexandrian-Cappadocia theologians were guided by it, although their attitude to the extent of applicability of allegoresis to certain texts of Scripture was different: from quite cautious and moderate in Gregory the Theologian and Basil the Great to extremely apologetic in Gregory of Nyssa. Gregory the Theologian is convinced that there is not a single “empty” word in Scripture - they are all significant and endowed with a special meaning, which is not always and not immediately noticeable to everyone. He is confident that not a single event or action in Scripture is described “for fun” or mindless pleasure of the ear. This was the passion of the Hellenic writers, condemned by almost all the fathers, who did not care at all “about the truth,” but sought to charm their readers (or listeners) with “the elegance of fiction and the luxury of expression.” We, Christians, proudly notes St. Gregory, “who extract spiritual meaning from every line and letter” of Scripture, are convinced that even the most insignificant acts described in it and preserved to our time have some higher meaning and benefit. Gregory repeatedly emphasizes in his treatises that the Bible has two meanings. Many of the texts of the Law are “profound and ambiguous” (Or.14:28) 12 ; The law has two meanings: one is open to everyone, and the other is hidden, accessible only to a few “who strive hard” (28:2). Here he is forced to enter into polemics with Hellenic allegorists - philosophical interpreters of ancient pagan mythology, who tried, in the spirit of late antique global symbolism, to justify some primitive and crudely obscene moments of ancient mythology from the point of view of a new spiritually oriented ethics. They argued that their myths, created according to the laws of “pleasant sweetness” and metrics, are, of course, fiction, but under “its luxurious appearance hides a more important idea, seen by the wise.” To which the fathers, and in particular Gregory the Theologian, usually answered that there is no fiction in Scripture and both its meanings are significant - both literal and hidden. At the same time, in contrast to the ancient “immoral” fables, Gregory of Nazianzus asserts, clearly contrary to reality (which his friend Gregory of Nyssa corrects), both levels of the text of Scripture are pious and worthy of the Divine. With his characteristic poetic imagery, he declares: “However, in our Scriptures the body (that is, the literal meaning of the text - V.B.) is itself light and envelops the god-like soul; This is a double garment - purple, shining through with a delicate silvery appearance. We have nothing shameful that would hide God. I am ashamed to use fiction to help the Divine” (PG 37, 1560). However, the hidden meaning, or deep level, of the text of Scripture is not accessible to everyone. Therefore, in ancient times, Nazianzus claims, the Jews had a wonderful law, according to which not everyone was allowed to read all the books of Scripture. Many of them were admitted only to those who had reached a certain level of spiritual maturity and appropriate preparation, so that the beauty of their deep meaning would become a pleasant reward for their efforts on the path of spiritual quest. In terms of age, these were people who had already passed the 25-year mark. For only at this age, according to St. Gregory, the young man could learn to overcome his sensory-somatic lusts and purify his mind to perceive the spiritual meanings of the sacred texts (Or.2:48). In our country, Gregory complains, the childish pathos of some kind of know-it-all flourishes. We have just spoken two or three words about piety, and even then from hearsay, and not from books, we have heard something about David, we know how to deftly put on a cloak 13 and we already consider ourselves wise men, philosophers, teachers of piety and interpreters of Scripture. Not paying attention to the letter (and not always knowing and understanding it), we rush to interpret everything “spiritually” and still expect praise for this. What vain vanity, what a vast field for idle talk,” Gregory is indignant. But all arts require long and painstaking study, and even more so the highest of them - wisdom (ibid.). Only it can provide the right thread for moving through the deeper meanings of Scripture. He himself is very careful in his interpretations and accompanies many of them with reservations such as “maybe”, “I suppose”, “it seems to me”, etc. Having a good command of the rich ancient (Greek, Jewish and early Christian) tradition of allegorical-symbolic understanding of the text, the tradition of exegesis of sacred texts, the Church Fathers were also aware of the dangers that this method of revealing the truth concealed. Under the influence of centuries-old exegetical culture, ancient traditions of verbal arts, rhetorical and sophistic skills, they constantly strive to find, under the literal text of Holy Scripture, the esoteric meanings of new divinely revealed knowledge about man, the world, God, the Church, and religion. However, the criteria for symbolic-allegorical interpretation were not (and it is hardly possible in principle) clearly formulated by anyone; they depended on the spiritual experience and verbal art of a particular interpreter, and this confused Christian philosophers, often forcing them to abandon allegorical meanings altogether or treat them very carefully. Most often, they had to take an ambivalent position, either denying meanings other than the literal one, or accepting them. In this regard, the position of Basil the Great is characteristic, especially clearly manifested in his famous Homilies on the Sixth Day. I know the laws of allegory (nomoys allegorias), although I did not invent them myself, but found them in the writings of others.” According to these laws, some give all written words a different, non-common meaning. They do not consider water to be water, a fish to be a fish, a plant to be a plant, etc. They explain all words, like dreams, “in accordance with their concepts” and their intentions. This subjectivism and arbitrariness outrage St. Basil, and he defiantly declares his literalist understanding of the texts of Scripture: “And when I hear about grass, I mean grass; likewise - plant, fish, beast and livestock - everything by which it is named, I accept for that” (Note. in Hex. IX I) 14. By this, Vasily believes, he gives greater glory to the Creator and Author of Scripture than those who, with their fabrications, try to give it even greater importance. However, this means nothing more than placing oneself “wiser than the words of the Spirit and, under the guise of interpretation, introducing one’s own thoughts. Therefore, let us understand it as it is written (IX 2). And in a number of other places St. Basil often seeks to contrast his “naked from all fabrications of the mind” understanding of Scripture (Note III 8) with pseudo-sublime, in his terminology, allegorical interpretations, similar to “fables of old women.” Reflecting on God’s creation of the firmament, which He called heaven (Gen. 1:8), and already knowing the allegorical interpretations of this fragment, he states: “If someone says that the sky means contemplative forces, and the firmament means active forces that carry out what needs to be done, then, taking this as a witty word, we will not completely agree that it is true” (ibid.). It is clear that Vasily throws stones here and into the garden of his brother St. Gregory of Nyssa, for whom such pan-allegorism, as we will see, was the norm in approaching the texts of Scripture. Yes, in fact, he enters into an internal polemic with himself, for in general he himself was quite often forced, and not at all without pleasure, to resort to allegorical methods of exegesis (including, as we will see below, he allegorically and very arbitrarily interprets the above verse from the Six Days about the creation of the firmament) and substantiate them theoretically. In the Homilies on the Sixth Day, the allegorical technique comes close to fundamental Christian creationism and ontologism, perhaps for the first time manifested with the greatest force precisely in Basil the Great. In the Sixth Day we are talking about God’s creation of the material world out of nothing; the most perfect and beautiful world. After the next stage of creation, God himself admires the results of his creativity (in the Book of Genesis the refrain is repeated: “And God saw that it was good / beautiful - kalon /”). How can we abandon the literal understanding of the term, meaning this or that reality that is part of this beautiful world? Moreover, they were created to praise God (cf. the calls of the prophet Daniel and the psalmist David for inanimate objects, elements, animals and plants to praise the Creator: Dan.3:64-72; Ps.149:7-10). That is why St. Vasily strives to read the Sixth Day more or less literally, emphasizing the beauty and perfection of the created world. However, a commonplace for him is the statement about the ambiguity of most texts of Scripture. Turning to an explanation of one or another of them, he often cites two of their meanings. One is literal, or historical (kath historian - Enar. in Isai. V 165), as Basil usually calls it, the other is more sublime, allegorical (hyponoia, tropologia). At the same time, he especially often emphasizes the presence of the second when studying the prophetic books, the Psalter, and countless passages of Scripture related to testimonies about God. The allegorical meaning, naturally, is valued more highly by Basil, for “it leads our thought to the most important research” (V 133) and is more “befitting” of Divine Scripture (Note. in Ps. XVIII 1). A prophetic saying, the Bishop of Caesarea is convinced, “taken in itself, contains a lot of useful things, but a hardworking [researcher] by raising the meaning to a higher understanding can increase the usefulness of this saying” (Enar. in Isai. V). And this procedure is quite natural and even necessary, since in Scripture, for the sake of clarity, spiritual things are often spoken of in sensory terminology. At the same time, Basil condemns ignorant people who, “through their wickedness, apply to God what is said in a human form, and understanding one-sidedly what the Scriptures have spoken in many parts and in various ways, are subject to fall” (Adv. Eun. V). It is better for these people not to take on the interpretation of sacred texts, but to diligently learn from those who have been given the gift of wisdom. In his interpretation of Psalm 45, Basil, in particular, shows that not everyone is given the ability to stretch his gaze to the Divine mystery, but only “those who are capable of becoming such a harmonious organ of promise that his soul is no longer set in motion by the psalterium, but by the action of the Holy Spirit on it” (Note. in Ps. XLV 1). The ancient biblical prophets, in particular, possessed such a gift. Basil calls it the “first gift” descending on selected and “thoroughly purified souls”; the gift of the authors of Holy Scripture is “to contain Divine inspiration and prophesy about God’s mysteries.” The next gift after this, he considers the gift of an exegete, who knows how to correctly understand and comprehend the speech of the prophet, which requires great effort and special flair; the gift “to listen to the meaning of what is prophesied by the Spirit and not to err in understanding what is proclaimed, but to be led directly to that understanding by the Spirit, according to whose economy the prophecy is written and which itself guides the mind of the one who has accepted the gift of knowledge” (Enar. in Isai. Prooem.l). Thus, according to Basil - and this was the general point of view of many Church Fathers - both the gift of prophecy in particular - the authors of Scripture, and the gift of understanding (interpretation) of sacred texts - from the Holy Spirit, which is actually the only criterion for the truth of this or that interpretation. A gift is a gift. It ultimately does not depend on the will of man. However, it is common for a Christian to have a desire “to receive the gift of wisdom, the gift of knowledge and the gift of teaching, so that all these, united together in the hegemonicon of our soul, capture the image of the whole truth contained in prophecy” (2). In this case, Vasily is talking about biblical prophecies (i.e., the texts of Scripture), for he discusses this in the Preface to the book “Commentaries on the Prophet Isaiah.” The most important conditions under which the gift of interpretation is possible are a highly moral, pious, virtuous life and constant and prolonged study of Scripture, “so that the importance and mystery of God’s word through constant study are imprinted on the soul.” The reading and study of Scripture should continue throughout a person's life (6). The fathers themselves, with all their rhetorical self-deprecating characteristics, as a rule, felt within themselves an exegetical gift and considered themselves completely worthy and adequate guides to the true meaning of the texts of Holy Scripture. Hence their inexhaustible exegetical pathos and irresistible desire to interpret almost all books of Scripture. The same Vasily, who assured readers that in the Sixth Day he honors and recognizes only its literal meaning under every word, several pages above the said assurance selflessly asserts that under the firmament in Genesis 1:6-7 only a completely blind spiritually does not see indications of the Only Begotten. At the same time, the sixth verse, “Let there be a firmament,” is an indication of the original Cause,” and the seventh verse, “God create the firmament,” is evidence of the creative and constructive Power!” (Note. in Hex. Ill 4). I will give several more interpretations of Vasily that later became almost traditional. In the 10th verse of Psalm 44, “The queen appears at Your right hand, dressed in golden garments” 15 St. Vasily understands the Church as the Queen. She stands “at the right hand of the Savior in gilded vestments, that is, magnificently and sacredly adorning herself with spiritual teachings, woven and adorned. Since dogmas are not of one kind, but are different and diverse, embracing natural, moral and mystical teachings, the psalm says that the Bride’s vestments are full of spots” (Note in Ps. 44 9). Interesting are the hermeneutical reflections of St. Basil about the vision of the prophet Isaiah: “Then one of the seraphim flew to me, and in his hand he had a burning coal, which he took with tongs from the altar, and touched my lips...” (Is. 6: 6-7). Basil rejects the literal understanding of this fragment and one of the allegorical ones known to him, in which the seraphim are understood as the two hemispheres of the sky. He sees in the seraphim, who approached the prophet, one of the “premium powers”, and by “burning coal” his creative imagination considers it possible (“maybe”!) to understand “the coming of the Lord in the flesh. For it is said: The Word became flesh (John 1:14) - flesh upon receiving the illumination of the Divine; due to its corporeality, it is subject to the senses, and because of its unity with God, it is enlightened and luminous. But such flesh took upon itself the sins of the world and cleansed our iniquities; and this is what the prophecy allegorically presents to us” (Enar. in Isai. VI 183). Seraphim did not dare to touch the Divine Altar and the burning coal with his hand, but took it with pincers, which clearly shows the Seraphim’s special respect and reverence. “Therefore, by burning coal we will understand the true Word, which, by kindling and denouncing, purifies the lie in those to whom it will be brought with effective power: for by the hand of Seraphim we should understand activity that is ready to bestow benefits” (186). Thus, in the understanding of the Bishop of Caesarea, God the Word himself cleansed and opened the lips of the prophet, only after which he was able to utter prophecies. A poetically and aesthetically elegant and quite convincing interpretation, although it can hardly be considered as such from the point of view of strict theology. “...My belly shall sound like a harp against Moab” (Is. 16:11). For Vasily, it is obvious that here we are talking about the “inner” of the prophet, which “harmoniously and musically produces euphonies” to the glory of the Lord (XVI 314). The well-known command of God to the first people: “Be fruitful and multiply” (Gen. 1:28) - Basil understands it in two ways: both literally and symbolically. He refers it to both the body and the soul of a person, which is ordered to grow spiritually in the sense of developing pious thoughts, deeds, virtues, etc. The term “multiply” is also interpreted by him as an indication of the spread of Christianity throughout the earth (De hom. str. II 2). Already these examples clearly show that the symbolic-allegorical approach to the texts of Scripture makes it possible to comprehend them as freely as desired, which contributed not only to the strengthening of the orthodox theological line, but also to the flourishing of all kinds of heresies - other interpretations. The Church Fathers themselves are constantly aware of this danger. However, the semi-fictional and historical texts of the Old Testament, the literal meaning of many of which does not correspond to the spirit of Christianity, force them to use a fundamentally polysemantic exegetical methodology. At the same time, they never tire of reminding you that you should approach it very carefully. One of the serious stumbling blocks for the theological thought of that time was, for example, the phrase expressed in the Book of Proverbs by the Wisdom of God about himself: “The Lord made me (ektisen me) the beginning of his ways into his works” (Proverbs 8:22). Having identified the Wisdom of God with God the Son and the eternal Word, the fathers find themselves in an uncomfortable situation with this passage. It seems to contradict the dogma of the uncreatedness of the Word (=Son), which is quite logically pointed out by all the heresearcs (Arius, Eunomius, etc.). In this delicate situation, the fathers again resort to their saving technique - aestheticized allegoresis. Polemicizing with Arius, St. Athanasius of Alexandria notes that since we are dealing here with a book of a special allegorical genre - this is “parables and it is said in parables,” we should not understand the text literally, for everything that “is said in parables is not expressed explicitly, but secretly,” and it is necessary to look for this hidden meaning, guided by pious thoughts (Contr. Ar. II 44). The same idea is repeated by Basil the Great in his polemic with Eunomius regarding the same phrase, arguing that it cannot be used as an argument in favor of the opinion of the creation of the Son. This statement is “in a book that contains a lot of hidden meaning, mostly in similarities, parables, dark and mysterious words, so that nothing indisputable and completely clear can be taken from it” (Adv. Eun. II 20). The fathers themselves, however, feeling the constant support of the Holy Spirit within themselves, are not afraid of the darkness and obscurity of the allegorical books and sayings of Scripture, but boldly explain them to both heretics and their fellow believers. At the same time, they often have to not only interpret certain hidden parts of texts, but also explain the very genre of allegorical books. In particular, St. Vasily discusses the genre of parable. The word parable (paroimia) is used by pagans (“external”, in Basil’s terminology) to designate certain special folk sayings, sayings, most often pronounced on the road, on the way, for oimos has the meaning of a path, and is defined as “a parting word, common in popular use, and from a little conveniently attached to a lot of the same.” For Christians, “a parable is a useful statement, proposed with moderate secrecy (met' epikrypseos metrias), and both at first glance containing a lot of useful things, and in its depths hiding a high thought.” The parable has no public meaning, but expresses the idea indirectly and is understandable only to discerning people (In princ. Prov. 2). In this regard, the Book of Proverbs of King Solomon testifies that proverbs “exceed the wisdom of the wise” (14). Therefore, Byzantine thinkers believe that one should approach such difficult books of Scripture as the books of Wisdom only after acquiring the appropriate skills in understanding “influent thoughts.” Gregory of Nyssa, in particular, writes about this, beginning his “Accurate Interpretation of Ecclesiastes of Solomon.” On the other hand, imaginative thinking for him is by no means an end in itself, but a kind of path. “Additional teaching,” he writes, “is only a kind of exercise of the soul, giving it “flexibility in church exploits” (In Eccl. I) 16. Nevertheless, he pays increased attention to this type of thinking, seeing it under almost every phrase, word, and letter of Holy Scripture. For him, it is all in its entirety - divinely inspired texts containing in a secret, allegorical, mysterious form the philosophy of existence, starting from the understanding of God himself, His actions, the created world and ending with man, his purpose, the system of his correct life and the prediction of future salvation (or punishment). Thus, Gregory considers the Book of Genesis “an introduction to the knowledge of God,” and calls the Book of Psalms “high philosophy”; through a consistent ascent to the “image of God,” and the philosophy (philosophia) of the Book of Song of Songs considers the height of teaching to be superior to the Book of Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes (Cant, cant, praef.), etc. The works of St. Gregory. Having realized the peculiar esotericism of the texts of Holy Scripture, he, like many of his predecessors and contemporaries, strives to find the key to the hidden semantic levels, to find a way to penetrate their secrets. In general terms and main principles, it is clear to him, for it was outlined both by Jesus himself in the Gospels and by the apostle. Paul in the Epistles, and his predecessor exegetes. This is a symbolic-allegorical understanding of the text and an attempt to give a more or less adequate, in its understanding, interpretation of biblical signs, symbols, and allegories. However, a significant stumbling block on this path is the methodology and criteria for determining and deciphering specific symbolic-allegorical images. Much, of course, had already been done in this direction before him - especially by Philo and Origen, and Gregory often uses their exegetical experience, following the established tradition. However, he tries to comprehend a lot himself, feeling within himself a divine gift for such activity. At the same time, he does not absolutize his specific interpretations, emphasizing, on the one hand, that the texts of Scripture are polysemantic in many places and his interpretation is one of the possible, and on the other hand, he himself is not always sure that the interpretation he gives is generally valid, and then inserts clauses (and quite often) like “as it seems to me” (dokei moi) or something similar 17 . Nevertheless, the pathos of Gregory’s own exegetical activity is surprisingly high, and his freedom and hermeneutic virtuosity in handling the texts of Scripture, as well as creative imagination in their interpretation, today could perhaps be envied by more than one poet, artist or follower of Heidegger or Derrida. Let us take a closer look at how Gregory sees the texts of Scripture and what paths to their understanding he finds. First of all, it is necessary to recall that the close attention of the Church Fathers to every word of Scripture is not only a tribute to the centuries-old ancient Christian homiletic-exegetical tradition, but also a direct consequence of the Christian concept of creationism. Faith in God's creation of the world with his Word prompts early Byzantine theologians to see this Word in all creation, expressed, however, non-verbally. “...The wisdom contemplated in creation is a word (logos), although not articulated (me enartros)” (PG 44, 73C), states Gregory of Nyssa in his homily “On the Sixth Day”. For by the divine voice that uttered commands about the creation of the world, of course, one should not understand that words similar to ours were uttered. The Book of Genesis speaks of the Divine “artistic (ten techniken) and wise Power” (113B), by which all created things were brought into being. This Power (=Word) still controls the world, found in every element of it. “The psalmist (meaning Ps. 104:27 - V.B.), having said that the active power of each of the created beings is brought into action by a certain word, made it clear that he called an unpronounceable word that way, but designated a certain force” (73C). This “word” put into nature by God was a “luminous word,” which, according to Gregory, Moses also testified to (76A). Thus, the entire creation is permeated with certain ineffable but effective words (logoi), which really signify the Word of God in creation and thereby sanctify the general concept of the word as directly and mysteriously involved in the innermost essence of the Divine Logos. The awareness of this, naturally, increased the pathos of any verbal activity and especially exegetical activity, aimed at identifying the truth hidden under the veil of the words of Holy Scripture. Gregory of Nyssa is convinced that the verbal images of Scripture lead us “to the mysterious knowledge of God” (372D), which would later be thoroughly developed by the author of the Areopagitik. Hence his unconditional conviction in the presence of a second, higher meaning behind almost all biblical texts. The understanding of Scripture, he states repeatedly, can be “carnal and earthly”, or maybe “exalted and heavenly” (De beat. 3). He is confident, in particular, that any historical event is described in biblical texts not for its own sake, but “in order to teach us some kind of teaching about a virtuous life, if historical consideration is replaced by a higher understanding” (In ps. inscr. II 2). Actually, Jesus himself showed his disciples the path of ascent from “empty and low concepts to the spiritual mountain of sublime contemplation (tes hypseles theorias)” (De beat. 1). On this “mountain” such benefits are acquired that are above all human feeling and knowledge, therefore it was impossible to give them “under their own names” (2). And these names do not exist in the human lexicon. Moreover, if we are talking about God himself and his essence. For the Church Fathers of the 4th century. God is unconditionally transcendental in his essence, that is, he is fundamentally incomprehensible to the human mind and indescribable. However, it is precisely this - “the confidence that the Divinity is above knowledge” - that allows us to preserve a “divine concept” about it (In Eccl. VII). And vice versa, every sublime thought ultimately leads us to God. St. Gregory is confident that everything that leads us “to an understanding of the best and sublime (hypseloteron) we call the understanding of God, for every sublime thought represents God to our vision” (De beat. 6). Hence Gregory’s increased attention to symbolic-allegorical interpretations. The more sublimely the text is interpreted, the closer it will bring us to an understanding of God himself. Another significant impetus for an allegorical understanding of the texts of Scripture is the ambiguity, uncertainty, and inconsistency of many places in almost all biblical books. Early Byzantine exegetes constantly point to this. “The ambiguity and uncertainty of the saying,” states Gregory of Nyssa, “give reason to look for something more than what is said” (5; cf.: Cant. cant. 2). In the Preface to his detailed Commentary on the Song of Songs, Gregory explains that he intends to show his readers what is hidden behind the literal content of this Book. He hopes that his work will become a guide for more carnal people on their path to “the spiritual and immaterial state of the soul, to which this book leads with the wisdom hidden in it” (Cant. cant. 756B). The literal meaning is always obvious, but if something in it is not very clear to understand, then such texts, as prescribed to us by the Word itself, which often teaches us in parables, must be considered “in a different meaning, understanding what is said either as a parable, or as an intricate speech, or as a saying of the wise, or as one of the riddles (cf. Proverbs 1:6). And let’s not argue about names if, according to the science of interpretation (literally - the science of construction: dia tes anagoges theorian. - V.B.) someone calls it an allegory (tropologian), or an allegory (allegorian), or something else; the main thing is to stick to useful meanings” (757A). The Apostle Paul did the same, interpreting “history” as “law,” that is, understanding it allegorically and edifyingly. Gregory cites many passages from the Epistles of St. Paul to the Corinthians. From the “letter” of the text, Paul often moves “to immaterial and mental contemplation,” which we should also do in order to change sensory concepts and images, shaking off “the carnal meaning like dust” (757CD), for, he quotes Paul, “the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life” (2 Cor. 3:6). Moreover, if we understand the texts of Scripture only literally, many of them offer us examples of a far from virtuous and pious life. There are frequent descriptions of adultery, murder, deception, etc. Anyone who intends to take everything in Scripture literally, as it were, offers us unrefined and unprocessed grains for food instead of bread. Divinely inspired texts, Gregory is convinced, just like grain for bread, must be pre-processed, that is, “prepared in a more subtle way” for use (764AB). The Fathers of the Church did this before us, states St. Gregory, we must continue such an important and godly work. The Bishop of Nyssa, like other Church Fathers, unfortunately does not dwell on any specific principles, or “rules” (as he sometimes calls them), of interpretation. To a large extent they are quite free and arbitrary. One of the main ones among them is, perhaps, the principle of context, the essence of which boils down to the following. The interpreted fragment of the text, a certain phrase or a specific term is quite freely interpreted using any fragment from this or other books of Scripture, chosen also quite freely on the basis of theological intuition and not always clear, as we will see in specific examples, aesthetic associations. At the same time, the allegorical meaning often turns out to be so far from the literal that it not only does not explain it, but often turns it, paradoxically (the paradox, however, is not something beyond the scope of patristic thinking), into an obstacle to the allegorical meaning. As Gregory himself writes, reflecting on the meaning of some images from the Song of Songs, “for those who have in mind the context of the entire speech, the meaning of these words seems somewhat dependent on the view previously communicated to us and consistently follows from it. The literal meaning, receiving depth from figurative meanings, makes it difficult to understand what is expressed in mysterious speech” (Cant. cant. Ill - 817C). Interesting are the reflections of Gregory of Nyssa on the use of individual words (and verbal images) in Scripture. Carefully reading the biblical texts, he notices that they do not always correspond to contemporary grammatical rules, notes the presence of “errors of phrases (tas soloikophaneis tou logoy syntaxeis) in Scripture,” which is quite understandable to him. The authors who wrote biblical books were naturally guided by the laws of word usage of their time and thought more about “making the word useful to those who receive it, but without going into lexical subtleties” (Ad Abl. 132C). This, however, imposes special obligations on modern interpreters of Scripture. They, the many-wise Gregory is convinced, must know and take into account the customs of word usage in the language of Scripture and the time of its creation. Naturally, in practice, neither Gregory himself nor his colleagues succeed in adhering to this scientific method due to the objective lack of relevant historical and linguistic data 18 . More often he resorts to a different semantic device, more accessible to the exegesis of his time. In relation to cataphatic (positive or affirmative) designations of God, he comes to the conclusion that ultimately they are all equivalent and actually mean one thing - God himself. Hence one name (for example, Truth, or Truth, or Virtue) becomes all-semantic: God “in one name is called by all names” 19 (De beat. 4). A reverse move is also possible in the hermeneutics of St. Gregory. He is convinced that to describe very high spiritual phenomena, one concept or verbal image is not enough (since words are generally quite imperfect), but they must be explained “by many similarities, because one cannot comprehend everything.” In this case we are talking about the beauty of the image of the Bride in the Song of Songs, by which Gregory, as we will see, understands the Church (Cant. cant. VI 897B). At the same time, the Bishop of Nyssa constantly emphasizes, one should not dwell on these designations, which are beautiful in themselves, but it is always necessary to “be guided to the sacraments signified by these descriptions” (Cant. cant.V 865BC). The theme of beauty in the theology of the Church Fathers quite consistently begins to be included in a more general system of symbolic thinking, endowing it with aesthetic coloring. The main guiding star in the endless sea of ​​allegorical meanings and the main criterion for the truth of a specific interpretation remains for Gregory, as for all the fathers, the grace of the Holy Spirit. Only she gives the exegete the gift of seeing under the “visible flesh of words” their “hidden brain,” and those who want to find the truth must constantly pray to the Revealer for this gift (Cant. cant. VI 901B). Philosophy (Gregory especially likes this term when applied to biblical texts) of Scripture, as understood by one of the wisest theologians of his age, is an active philosophy. First of all, it itself influences the reader or listener, directing and shaping his inner world (“the inner man,” in Gregory’s words), his soul and initiating his feelings and mind for further conscious, in-depth and almost endless penetration into its depths. At the same time, different books of Scripture affect those who come into contact with them in different ways and at different levels. Thus, the Book of Psalms is addressed both to the mind and to the feelings of those who turn to it. The meaning and spiritual content of each psalm are multi-valued and provide rich food for the mind, and the very figurative, poetic and musical structure of the psalms actively processes our souls in the direction of bringing them closer to the ideal - the image of Christ. Gregory understands this “processing” (or rather, presents it to readers for a more visual understanding) in an artistic and plastic way, comparing it with the activity of a sculptor who works in a certain order. First, he cuts out the stone block he needs from the rock, then cuts off the excess parts, hollows out recesses, and gradually reveals the still rather rough image of the depicted (say, some kind of animal). Then, using thinner tools and careful movements, he evens out the roughness of the stone, achieving the most similar “type of prototype.” After this, he gives the surface “great smoothness and imparts beauty to the work by all means that art knows” (In ps. inscr. II 11–541D-544A). In the same way, the psalms act on our soul, which has become petrified from addiction to the material world of things, in order to restore it to its original godlikeness. First, the Psalmist separates us from the vice with which we are firmly fused; then cuts off the excess matter and begins to give our soul a form similar to the prototype, “by teaching finer thoughts and, purifying and leveling our minds, by the imprint of virtue, reflects (emmorphoi) in us Christ, in whose image we were created and so become again” (544B). To accomplish this task, according to the Bishop of Nyssa, the composition of the Book of Psalms was organized in this sequence. It does not follow the chronological order of historical events spoken of in certain psalms, but strives only most effectively “with the help of virtue to form (morphosai) our souls according to God” (my italics - V.B.). Just as a sculptor, having at his disposal many different tools, uses them in the sequence that his work requires, without being interested in what time which one was made, so the order of the psalms is determined not by the order of historical events, but solely by the “need of doing,” that is, by the purpose indicated above (544CD). Gregory sees in the composition of the Psalter five sections, unequal in the number of psalms (see: In ps. inscr. I 5 - 449B), with the help of which the consistent ascent of the soul to God is carried out, or its consistent processing in the direction of becoming like God. Thanks to the first section (the first 40 psalms), “we are separated from a vicious life, and by subsequent sections, in a continuous sequence [of treatment], the likeness is brought to perfection. Therefore, the order of the psalms is structured...” (II 11 – 544BC). With the first group of psalms, the Prophet restrains the wicked from sinful acts, the second (the next 31 psalms) introduces them to the path of virtues and gives the first touch to the divine source. The third group (17 psalms) is dedicated to the praise of the heavenly and sublime, instruction in the beautiful; the fourth group (another 17 psalms) is addressed to believers who have already entered into “unity” with God. And finally, with the fifth group (the last 45 psalms), the Prophet takes us to the spiritual peak, to the “highest level of contemplation” (449B-465C). At the same time, the musical and poetic form of the psalms plays an important role on the path of ascent along these steps. The priority of aesthetic consciousness over strictly theological or philosophical in the approach to the Book of Psalms by St. Gregory is quite obvious, and it is completely understandable and justified, since he is talking about the deep processes and methods of influence of this Book on the soul of the believer, which are significantly different from any school didactics or formal logical training. The early Byzantine thinker senses this well and, firstly, resorts to analogies from the non-formalized sphere of creativity - the plastic arts, and secondly, he often places emphasis both when interpreting the inscriptions of the psalms, and when comprehending them themselves, on the informal-logical, often actually artistic aspects of their form and content. In general, the method of turning to aesthetic consciousness, when formal-logical thinking encounters certain difficulties, is quite characteristic of many other Church Fathers, especially the Alexandrian-Cappadocia school. It was in the sphere of the aesthetic that they found non-conceptual solutions to what is not amenable to direct discursive comprehension and understanding. First of all, this applies to the symbolic-allegorical exegesis of the fathers - and Gregory of Nyssa in particular. In fact, the very appeal to an image, symbol, allegory, parable and any other forms of other-telling testifies to the activity of aesthetic consciousness, although within the framework and for purposes that may not be strictly aesthetic and often even far from those that we regularly observe in ancient and medieval cultures. However, in Gregory, as in his predecessors Philo, Clement and Origen, aesthetic pathos in allegorical exegesis perhaps prevails over other components of this essentially theological activity. It manifests itself especially clearly in his fundamental work “An Accurate Interpretation of the Song of Solomon.” Before Gregory, this book was interpreted in sufficient detail by Origen, and the Bishop of Nyssa largely uses the material of his predecessor, which he himself openly declares. However, it significantly expands, complements and rethinks it. The systematizing mind of the great Cappadocian, according to established tradition, attributes the authorship of the books of Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs to King Solomon, whose hand, in his conviction, was guided by the Wisdom of God itself. And all three books seem to him to be a kind of “ladder” along which the soul is consistently improved and raised to God. At the same time, “the philosophy of the Song of Songs surpasses both other books in the sublimity of its dogmas” (Cant. cant. I – 768A). Basil the Great assessed these three books in a similar way. The book of Proverbs serves moral education and, in general, the diverse life activities of man. Ecclesiastes calls us not to waste our energy on the transitory vanity of the earthly world, and the Song of Songs “shows the way to perfect the soul, for it depicts the agreement of the bride and groom, that is, the closeness of the soul with God the Word” (In princ. Prov. 1). According to Gregory of Nyssa, the Book of Proverbs is intended for spiritual infants. Here they are offered "children's jewelry" as a reward for diligence in their studies. The wisdom of God is depicted in “the beauty of inexpressible beauty” in order to arouse lust and love for it in young hearts. Thus, Solomon prepares the young man for cohabitation with a beautiful bride - Wisdom (Cant. cant. I - 769AB). In Ecclesiastes the author reveals higher knowledge to those already prepared to receive wisdom. Here, above everything sensually perceived, he places “the innate movement of our soul towards invisible beauty.” And only after this, having cleansed the heart from the disposition towards the visible, he “secretly guides” our mind inside the divine sanctuary with the Song of Songs, in which “what is written is a kind of preparation for marriage, and what is implied (to ennooymenon) is the unity of the human soul with the Divine” (769D-772A). Therefore, the one who in Proverbs is called a son is here called a bride, and Wisdom is put in the place of the groom, “so that man may be ignorant of God, from the bridegroom becoming an immaculate virgin and clinging to the Lord and becoming one with Him in spirit” (772A). Through the actions described in the Song, the soul in a special way “is prepared as a bride for an incorporeal, spiritual and immaterial union with God.” Thus, the Song indicates “the most perfect and blessed way of salvation, namely through love (dia tes agapes)” (765B). Hence the Song is understood by Gregory as the most sublime, secret, esoteric book in Scripture. In it, the Divine Word does not address us directly, but “philosophizes through the ineffable” (di' aporreton philosophei), forming a certain “mental image” of lofty objects with the help of “what delights in life,” namely by depicting sensual passion and lust for beauty. At the same time, the bride, and not the groom, speaks about her feelings completely openly and without any shame, as is usually customary among people (772B). Gregory is clear that here we are not talking about earthly things, but about the highest “mystery of secrets.” The Book of Song itself, to which he repeatedly points out, seems to him to be the main thing in Scripture - its “holy of holies” (773B), for it speaks of such objects, above which the human mind cannot imagine anything, its hearing or all nature cannot accommodate. That is why the wise Solomon clothed these secrets in images of what in earthly life gives us the greatest pleasure, that is, in erotic images, terms, descriptions, appeals, etc. With their help, he sought to raise our spirit to the “unapproachable beauty of divine nature,” painting with passionate “sayings” a picture of sublime love, devoid of any earthly sensual passion. Just as in the art of painting no one will examine separately each of the colors with which a picture is painted, but pays attention only to what is depicted by these colors, so in the text of the Song, St. Gregory, one should pay attention not to the substance of verbal colors (that is, not to the erotic and love images of the literal text), but to “the image imprinted by them in pure concepts.” Accordingly, all “passionate speeches” of the Song such as: lips, kisses, breasts, names of other members, bed, embrace, wine, etc. should be considered only as paints (chroma) of white, yellow, black, red, blue or any other color. “The image formed from them is bliss, dispassion, unity with the Divine, distance from evil deeds, true likeness to the beautiful and good. These are concepts that testify to Solomon’s wisdom, surpassing the limits of human wisdom!” – St. exclaims with hermeneutic pathos. Gregory (776B). Whoever, under the carnal voluptuousness of the Song, and other books of Scripture, sees a higher divine meaning, he, according to the conviction of the wise father of the Church, proves that he is no longer actually a man, “but has a nature not made of flesh and blood, and, thanks to dispassion, having become equal to the angels, he already manifests in himself the life expected in the resurrection of the saints” (776D). It must be assumed that Gregory also included himself in this category of beings, since he was one of the most zealous supporters and teachers of such an understanding of the imagery of Holy Scripture. I will give just a few typical examples of his exegesis. Already in the first verse of the Song: “Let him kiss me with the kiss of his lips!” – Gregory understands by the virgin who utters this phrase both the human soul and the Church, showing immediately (which he will later formulate more clearly) the fundamental polysemy of biblical images and thereby de facto their belonging to the sphere of aesthetic consciousness. Regarding the soul, this verse awakens in the Bishop of Nyssa the confidence that, having entered into unity with God, it cannot be satisfied with pleasure (apolayseos) and “the more abundantly it is filled with what delights, the stronger the desires act in it.” He associates the same image with the Virgin Church, who loved the divine Bridegroom. His lips are the source of Spirit and Life, so she strives to venerate them, for His kiss “is a cleanser from all filth” (777D-780A). The words of the Song “I am black, but beautiful” (1, 4) (in the Septuagint, which Gregory used: (Melaina eimi kai kale – 1, 5) he interprets in a completely free ethical-aesthetic plane. The Bride (= soul = Church) tells us here about the endless love of the Lord. Behold, I was black from sin and my deeds, but the Bridegroom from his endless love “made me beautiful, giving me his own beauty in exchange for my ugliness, for he took upon himself the filth of my sins, and gave me his purity and made me a partaker of his Beauty” (Cant. cant. II - 789C) The Apostle Paul was in a similar situation at one time, recalls Gregory. to make those who are blackened bright, light-like, worthy of love (792AB). The sun, drying up the plant when its roots have no moisture, and “blackening” the bride, means temptation here. And although human nature, “being an image of true light, was created shining in the likeness of the original Beauty, and darkened features are not characteristic of it,” however, temptation, deceiving it by exposing it to the withering heat, turned its “green and good-colored appearance” into black, ugly (793AB). Gregory gives an extensive aestheticized interpretation to almost every verse and almost every term of the Song. “I have likened you to my mare in Pharaoh’s chariot, my beloved. Why are your cheeks adorned like turtle doves, and your neck like monists? We will create for you golden likenesses (homoiomata) with silver spangles” (Cant. 1:9–11). This fragment makes it possible for St. Gregory to speculate about horses, and about the turtledove, and about gold and silver jewelry, and about many other things in their symbolic and allegorical meanings. At the same time, to identify specific semantics, he extremely freely uses the entire boundless field of biblical and near-biblical theological contexts and associations, engaging in virtually new meaning-making of an improvisational nature within the still emerging Christian theology. Verses 9-10 are spoken by the Bridegroom, and verse 11 by his friends. This raises an interesting hermeneutical passage. “Since the beauty of the soul is likened to the horses - the destroyers of the Egyptian chariots, that is, to the angelic army, and to these horses, says the beautiful Horseman, the bridle is purity, which he designated by likening the cheeks of turtle doves, and the decoration of the neck is various necklaces shining with virtues; then it is desirable for friends to make some addition to the beauty of the horses, removing the harness, speckled with the purity of silver, in golden likenesses, so that the beauty of the decoration shines even brighter when the brightness of the gold is dissolved with the shine of silver” (Cant. cant. 3 – 817CD). By horses, or mare, Gregory understands the human soul, therefore, he believes, it is first necessary to adorn the horse itself, in order to then “take upon itself the Tsar’s rider.” Why does the text speak of “the likeness of gold”, dotted with silver patterns? Gregory further reflects and expresses his “assumption”: any teaching about the ineffable Nature, no matter how lofty and magnificent it may be, is still not gold itself, but only its likeness. “For it is impossible to accurately depict the Good that surpasses [all] understanding” (820C). To us, all lofty concepts about God (that is, what would later constitute cataphatic theology in Dionysius the Areopagite) appear as gold, but for those who have the ability to see the Truth, the Bishop of Nissa is convinced, they are only “a semblance of gold, appearing in thin sparkles of silver. Silver is a name for words, according to Scripture: choice silver is the tongue of the righteous (Prov. 10:20)” (820D). From here Gregory draws an apophatic conclusion, which, however, legitimizes the role of aesthetic consciousness in religious epistemology. The nature of God exceeds all rational understanding. The concepts that arise in us about Him are only similarities to what we are looking for. “Every word denoting such concepts has the force of some indivisible point 20, which cannot explain what thought requires; hence, every understanding is lower than divine thought, and every interpretative word seems to be an imperceptible point that is not able to extend to the fullness of the meaning” (821 A). Therefore, the friends of the Groom decorate the horse with certain “images and likenesses of truth,” but the potency of these “silver words” is such that they seem only to be instantaneous sparkling flashes that are not able to highlight the full meaning contained in them (821B). What can we say about this elegant and profound passage? If we forget for what reason it arose, then from a theological point of view everything here is correct. Moreover, here (as in most of the exegetical works of Gregory of Nyssa) serious foundations are laid for cataphatic, apophatic, and symbolic theologies, on which the author of the Areopagitik will then rely. If, however, we recall those specific verses of the Song that initiated its appearance, then modern scientific theology is unlikely to recognize it, like many other specific interpretations of Gregory, as sufficiently correct and adequate. But what is modern, many of the Fathers of the Church, including the contemporaries of the great Cappadocian, considered such interpretations of Scripture to be too free and arbitrary, leading believers away from the “true” meaning of the biblical texts and thereby undermining their authority. And if you take the position of formal logical thinking, you cannot but agree with them. However, how much does formal logical thinking mean for faith, for religion? Is its weight generally so great among other components of Culture? Today, at the beginning of the third millennium of the Christian era, we can say with greater reason than ever that it is not as great as it seemed to the rationalistically oriented consciousness from the time of Aristotle to the present day. Almost any true art, any religious consciousness at all times was oriented, or more precisely, was guided not by ratio and its derivatives, but by some other spiritual forms and phenomena. In particular, many Fathers of the Church, especially regular representatives of the Alexandrian-Cappadocia movement, perfectly mastered all the delights of ancient dialectics and rhetoric, nevertheless acutely felt their insufficiency when approaching the super-rational spheres of consciousness, the highest levels of the spiritual, and looked for some other ways of penetrating them, expressing the acquired spiritual experience. Fortunately, there was no need to look for something fundamentally new, hitherto unknown to humanity, because since ancient times forms and methods of non-rational, non-rational expression already existed. In particular, these include the entire vast sphere of artistic thinking and aesthetic consciousness. Unfortunately, the mind for a long time could not and did not want, and often even now does not want to admit this. It is difficult for a ratiocentric culture to undertake such a “undermining” of its positions. Nevertheless, in practice, the majority of its (this culture’s) most talented representatives, both in the past and now, actively use (consciously or unconsciously) the experience, forms and methods of non-rational aesthetic consciousness, artistic thinking. Many Church Fathers not only do not form an exception here, but, on the contrary, often acted as masterly and selfless adherents and propagandists of this practice. Among them, without any doubt, first of all belonged Gregory of Nyssa, a talented theologian and thinker, gifted with the ability of artistic and aesthetic penetration into spiritual spheres that cannot be described formally and logically. His free semi-artistic improvisations on the themes of almost every phrase or word of Holy Scripture, often extremely aestheticized, did not so much reveal and reveal to the reader the hidden meaning of specific interpreted phrases (for often his exegetical passages have almost nothing to do with them, which, as we have seen, St. Gregory himself was often aware of), but rather immerse him in the hidden essential depths of Christian spiritual culture, initiate into the spiritual experience of the great father himself and his contemporaries. This is, perhaps, the main meaning and enduring cultural, historical and spiritual significance of the free, extremely aestheticized allegorical exegesis of the Church Fathers of the 4th century. The Cappadocian Fathers and many other theologians of the 4th-5th centuries. Almost all texts of Holy Scripture were subjected to fairly free allegorical exegesis. In the process of this almost boundless practice of interpretation, such semiotic concepts as allegory, image, allegory, symbol, parable, sign, sign actually occupied the main place in the system of thinking of the Byzantines. And not only when approaching sacred texts, but in relation to the Universe as a whole. In particular, in the process of interpreting specific biblical texts, the fathers comprehended (or assigned) the symbolic meaning of all objects, things, events, phenomena, names of people, etc. found in the Bible - almost all biblical vocabulary 21 . And this vocabulary actually constituted the bulk of all ancient vocabulary, that is, with its help the entire created universe was practically described. Thus, every really existing element and phenomenon of the material world and people’s ideas about it received a symbolic-allegorical understanding from early Byzantine thinkers, that is, it was endowed with symbolic meaning. The entire universe appeared as a system of polysemantic and rather arbitrary symbols, in which the Byzantine had to find his rightful, real and symbolic place. Already at the turn of the 5th-6th centuries, he tried to streamline the symbolic bacchanalia of the early Byzantines at the methodological level. author of the Areopagitik, creating a detailed system of his symbolic theology. See for more details: Bychkov VV. Aesthetics of the Church Fathers: Apologists. Blessed Augustine. M., 1995. pp. 35–52. The following works are devoted to the topic of figurative-symbolic hermeneutics among the Fathers of the Church: Simonetti M. Profilo storico dell'esegesi patristica. Rome, 1981; Idem. Lettera e/o allegoria: Un contribute alia storia dell'esegesi patristica. Rome, 1985; Kan-nengiesser C. Handbook of Patristic Exegesis. The Bible in ancient Christianity. Leiden, 2006. Bd. 1–2; Nesterova O. E. Allegoria pro typologia. Origen and the fate of allegorical methods of interpreting Holy Scripture in the early patristic era. M., 2006; Early Christian and Byzantine exegesis: Sat. Art. M., 2008. See for more details: Bychkov V.V. Aesthetics of the Church Fathers. pp. 215–251. See: Nesterova O.E. Allegoria pro typologia. Texts of St. Gregory the Theologian quoted from the publication: PG, tt. 35–38. The cloak was revered in Antiquity as the clothing of a philosopher and acted as a symbol of wisdom. Texts of St. Basil the Great are quoted from the publication: PG, tt. 29–32. I cite the Old Slavonic translation of the Bible (which is made according to the Septuagint) only in those cases where the Greek text of Scripture, which was used by St. Vasily, differs in some way from the Hebrew on which the Synodal translation is focused. Texts of St. Gregory of Nyssa quoted from: PG, tt. 44–46. See: PG 44, 781С, 820С, 833С, etc. Although the problem of language itself was of quite keen interest to the Church Fathers. See interesting research on this matter: Edelshtein YM. The problem of language in patristic monuments // History of linguistic teachings. Medieval Europe. L., 1985. pp. 157–207. Alia panta di' henos onomatos onomadzetai. Stigmes tinos ameroys - here by “dot” we mean that stigma in the text of the Song, which in the expression meta stigmaton toy argyrioy is usually translated as silver mottled, silver spangles. For specific examples of symbolic-allegorical interpretation by the Cappadocians of some things and objects from biblical texts, see: Bychkov VV. A brief history of Byzantine aesthetics. Beograd, 2012, pp. 121–149.